It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cecile Richards admits that 86% of Planned Parenthood’s (non-government revenue) is from abortions

page: 14
35
<< 11  12  13   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2015 @ 03:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
So, reading between the lines and getting right to the point, you basically advocate the mother's right to kill the father's baby without his consent, and you support the idea of deadbeat dads who want nothing to do with the child that they are "JUST as responsible for" creating in the first place?


I suggest you don't read between any lines or tell me what I am basically advocating. My communications are clear. If there's something you don't understand, just ask. But I won't defend anything I did not say.



Please don't tell me that you also have a hard time figuring out why there's such a lack of respect for human life in our society these days--the irony would be too much for me to handle.


Don't worry, I won't.




posted on Sep, 30 2015 @ 03:47 PM
link   
There is no longer a need for Planned Parenthood because everything they did is Now Covered Under Obamacare except for
abortions that the government never paid

This is all unneeded BS that the democrats are playing to try to make the GOP look bad.



posted on Sep, 30 2015 @ 04:05 PM
link   
a reply to: ANNED

I'm a 57 year old unemployed (mainly because of health problems) widow, with no income...or health insurance.

My husband passed away in february, when can one sign up for obamacare? and well will they subsidize 100% of the premium? if so, what about the thousands of dollars you have to pay before insurance will start benefitting you?
I don't need birth control, or an abortion or anything like that, I need what I have needed for the past decade plus.... enough help with the medical bills to get myself in a position to work... that's all I've been asking for all along. but nope!! they wouldn't then, and they won't now. I don't qualify for medicaid. I don't qualify for help with the rent, I don't qualify for help when it comes to gas money. I'd get a little bit of food assistance, but well, you need to keep a head over your head and have an address to get it. and a little bit of help with energy during that part of the year when the bills get outrageously high. otherwise, forget it!!!

so, tell me again how obamacare made everything all so peachy???

and oh, just so you know, all those nice religious employers who got their exemption from having to provide coverage for birth control.....
well.....title x was the alternative that the supreme court chose to use an an example for the gov't to use as a bypass to the coverage.



posted on Sep, 30 2015 @ 07:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: GeisterFahrer

I think the fairy tales you read claim babies get there all by themselves. All yu have to do is pick up the baby from the cabbage patch and chuck it in a meat grinder.

You can even make money off of parting the baby out - just like an old dodge pick up ... yee haw!


I'm not sure what gives you that idea. I know where babies come from, believe me. You're the one who seems confused about procreation as you think all it takes is a woman to make one. As if immaculate conception has produced all 7 billion of us somehow.

I suppose you could make some money off of parting out those baby bodies but of course that is illegal and something you'd have to do on the black market, but I wouldn't recommend it. Or they could be used in research to actually save lives which is typically what happens.

Reality, while being a little less dramatic, is much more reasonable than your paranoid fantasy version. But I'm sure your version would make a great sci-fi show.


here let me explain it to you.

Babies do not pop out of a man's vagina. They pop out of a woman's vagina. I am not sure if you knew that part of the birth procedure so I felt it was necessary to remove any preconceived ideas you may have.

yes, it does take a man's sperm to help create a baby - but that makes a man an accessory to life - not an accessory to murder, since the baby does not pop out of the man's vagina.

I hope I made this clear. If it isn't clear, feel free to put your fairy tale book down and ask me anything. I will simply tell you the truth (unlike the liars at PP).



posted on Sep, 30 2015 @ 08:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: GeisterFahrer

here let me explain it to you.

Babies do not pop out of a man's vagina. They pop out of a woman's vagina. I am not sure if you knew that part of the birth procedure so I felt it was necessary to remove any preconceived ideas you may have.

yes, it does take a man's sperm to help create a baby - but that makes a man an accessory to life - not an accessory to murder, since the baby does not pop out of the man's vagina.

I hope I made this clear. If it isn't clear, feel free to put your fairy tale book down and ask me anything. I will simply tell you the truth (unlike the liars at PP).


I doubt you could explain anything to me. BTW, men don't have have vaginas so obviously no babies are going to come from one.

You're being intentionally obtuse which is clear so I'm going to ignore you now. I know you know what my point was and I refuse to waste more time playing games with you.

As I've already clearly stated I'm not the one with the Fairy Tale book. That would be you and your Bible. I don't believe in myth and magic as you do. But we both already know that don't we.

Now run along and go annoy someone else for a while because the grown ups have things to do which you wouldn't understand.



posted on Sep, 30 2015 @ 09:10 PM
link   
www.rawstory.com...

Thought this is relevant here since the video was posted in this thread.

Just shows the deception of what these videos are trying to use.



posted on Sep, 30 2015 @ 09:11 PM
link   
Hey, I just ran across this article here:

www.americanindependent.com...

and well, I am gonna try to look into it more tomorrow but this one little clip right here kind of struck me:




It will also eliminate the entire Title X program, which was founded in 1970 and is the only federal grant program dedicated solely to providing individuals with comprehensive family planning and preventive health services, particularly to low-income families, according to the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services’ Office of Population Affairs. Preventative health services include breast and cervical cancer screenings, HIV prevention education, pregnancy diagnosis and counseling.


This kind of sounds like they don't want to defund planned parenthood, they want to kill the entire title x program!!!



posted on Sep, 30 2015 @ 09:19 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar
oops, my bad, old article it seems that now, mike pence is a governor. but it's kind of ironic just how much the story fits the past few weeks...



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 07:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

I suggest you don't read between any lines or tell me what I am basically advocating. My communications are clear. If there's something you don't understand, just ask. But I won't defend anything I did not say.


Okay, I'll take your suggestion on this one and be a bit more direct...

1. Do you basically advocate the mother's right to kill the father's baby without his consent? Because your own words explicitly say so.

2. Do you support the idea of deadbeat dads who want nothing to do with their child--who are "JUST as responsible for" creating said child? Because your own words explicitly say so.

Truth be told, I have no problem with reading between the lines, as reading comprehension was something that I always tested obnoxiously high on, so if you're trying to tell me that (a) you do not advocate a mother's "right" to kill the father's baby with his consent, and that (b) you do not support the idea of deadbeat dads who don't want to be there in any way for their own child, then you have some major backtracking to do concerning your previous comments.

Otherwise, I'd suggest you don't suggest anything to me, because everything that you said is here for everyone to see, and trying to pretend that you do not advocate the things that you have said makes discussing this issue with you like talking to a politician. You are correct that your communications are clear, so I'm at a loss as to why you're trying to coach me as to which of your communications I can use to infer your stance on the subjects about which you speak.

You made the comments--if you find my interpretation of them to be incorrect, either correct me by elaborating, or just quit discussing it altogether, but telling me (or anyone else) that we can't use your comments as a means to figure out what you advocate is ludicrous.



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 07:45 AM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

You know I support the woman's choice to have an abortion. Putting it in your own emotional words doesn't change that. I am pro-choice. I wouldn't have an abortion myself, but I support freedom to choose. If my own words explicitly say so, then you don't have to rephrase or ask again.

I support an option for male abortion. If my own words explicitly say so, then you don't have to rephrase or ask again.

Everything I have said is here (and many other places on this board) for everyone to see. I'm not at all ashamed or embarrassed of my stance. I have held it for some time now.

If you have any further confusion or questions, let me know. But MY personal position on these issues is HARDLY relevant in a thread about PP's investigation.



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 07:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

I saw that this morning. The thread title is a bit misleading. Daleiden doesn't actually admit this. The interviewer just traps Daleiden with his questions. It's pretty much the same thing to most people, but the difference is just slight enough so that the pro-life camp can say that the article is being deceptive.



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 08:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Then please don't suggest I don't read between the lines when what I said is correct. I don't need you, nor anyone else on here, to tell me how to respond in my comments.

Thanks for responding, though, and I appreciate your desire for me to be more direct. I will do so from now on.




posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 01:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Ya i caught that right away too. Was even more misleading until SO added the non gov part. The op aemitted to not even watching the interview but still posting about it.



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 02:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80



Obsessed.

Lots of perceptions and idealisms broken now.




posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 02:46 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

What are you talking about?

How do you feel about the guy posting the video, that you posted on this site, of the that still birth and then tried to pass it off as an abortion?

Or was that part of the pysop shill something something smiley.



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 03:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic
I don't need you, nor anyone else on here, to tell me how to respond in my comments.


I didn't tell you how to respond. I made a suggestion. JUST like you did here...



Then please don't suggest I don't read between the lines when what I said is correct.



On Topic:

Planned Parenthood Clinic Targeted by Arsonist

I have been wondering if this whole brouhaha would start some violent attacks...



A Planned Parenthood Health Center was targeted by an arsonist who broke a window and threw an accelerant that ignited a small fire near midnight Wednesday, authorities said.
...
The incident came a day after a Congressional committee aggressively questioned Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards in a hearing that her defenders claimed was a Republican attack on abortion rights.


Fortunately, the fire was extinguished and no one was hurt.



posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 04:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic


I have been wondering if this whole brouhaha would start some violent attacks...



A Planned Parenthood Health Center was targeted by an arsonist who broke a window and threw an accelerant that ignited a small fire near midnight Wednesday, authorities said.
...
The incident came a day after a Congressional committee aggressively questioned Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards in a hearing that her defenders claimed was a Republican attack on abortion rights.


Fortunately, the fire was extinguished and no one was hurt.


Hmmmm.

False Flag to get sympathy?




posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 04:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

Haven't you figured it out yet?

The whole thing is a psy-ops.




posted on Oct, 1 2015 @ 09:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic




On Topic:

Planned Parenthood Clinic Targeted by Arsonist

I have been wondering if this whole brouhaha would start some violent attacks...


Fundamentalist Christian Terrorists




top topics



 
35
<< 11  12  13   >>

log in

join